Italy 1901-26 Question

I'm sure it's a easy answer but not known to me
So as you can see in the images the EY2 is clearly brown
And the EY3 is lighter
It says in the book both are based off the same stamp the AD2
So the questions I have are
1-is it just a simple variation of colour like the light blue #35 I posted earlier
No -# change
My second question is when the variation of colour occurred
Was there a change in perforation or should it all be 14x14?

May also help answer my question about #192

Ok so I'll ask about the #192


Says 171/2 x22mm and a Perf of 14
Again let me know if I'm doing it wrong trying to learn

Is there a question in any of this? Looks like someone wrote the perfs down for you.

Really......

Previous post above-
So the questions I have are
1-is it just a simple variation of colour like the light blue #35 I posted earlier
No -# change
My second question is when the variation of colour occurred
Was there a change in perforation or should it all be 14x14?

Then I showed the info given in the scotts about the #192
Size in mm and perforations
Showed pictures and wrote down the info of what I have
And asked if I was doing something wrong
3 questions
and you ask if there's a question
All I do is ask questions
if you don't have a answer That's ok
Seriously you didn't have to scroll up very far to see

Let me try to help.
Just_fella, the confusion appears to be a couple of procedural issues, i.e. the way that you ask your questions.

First, please only post questions about one stamp per thread. That allows everyone to know which stamp (series of stamps) is under discussion. It also allows you to make a specific title for the thread that can be found when others have questions about that stamp(s). This specific thread title is really to general.

Second, stop asking if you should ask about a stamp. Just ask your question using the best full sentence that you can, including a question mark (?) at the end. It really does help. You can and should continue to explain what you know about the stamp before or after your question.

Good luck.

These things will help those with the knowledge that you seek to better help you.

Wkusau
Thanks positive feed back I'll try to do better
I felt most of the stamps had similarities around the same question
So I did bulk them together instead of doing a tread per stamp
The issues I keep having are the perforations,size (mm) and colour not
Listed in the books I have
Usually I see the perforations listed and they match.
I see the colour variations listed
The actual size (mm) is listed
Watermarks are listed
When I don't see them in the books I ask
I post pictures to be clear about what I'm seeing
I write some stuff beside it for more clarity
And still ask if I'm using the gauges properly ,
so far nobody has said anything
I'm not gonna assume I am
Sometime I over look and don't see the proper listing
Trying to learn

A couple of observations. In the overwhelming majority of cases (i.e. unless the catalogue specifically refers to differences in the size of the design), no purpose is served by measuring the design. Similarly, unless the catalogue shows a range of perforations for a stamp, there's no point in measuring those either. To use a gauge of the type you have, you can either align the points on the gauge with those of the perforations or fit your stamp into the gaps on the gauge. I asked what "EY2" meant because, used in isolation, it's a meaningless group of numbers and figures. And bear in mind that, in any case, most of the world doesn't use Scott catalogues.

What is the Most used catalogue?
what should I have referred the EY2 as?
I only check to be as accurate as I can
With the #192 I measured because the same stamp was used with other denominations
But the size and perforations changed

You should carry on using Scott, but, ideally, explain which stamp you're talking about, eg France Scott X93, 5c postage due, 1852. There's no point in measuring design or perforations if a particular stamp was only issued in one size and with one set of perforations. So it would only be worth your neasuring the perforations of the 50c Victor Emmanuel if there were a further issue of the 50c in which the perforations were changed.

In the case of Italy EY3, I would say that the design of the underlying stamp has been lightened so that the overprint is more clearly visible.

If you look at other examples for Italy in your catalog you'll see something similar. I believe this is a standard practice by Scott in their illustrations, although I'm not sure they mention it anywhere in the catalog.

I will make one more recommendation. Scott has a lot of very useful information at the beginning of each volume. You would be well served to spend some time going over it. In the 2009 volume 3, it is covered in pages 10A - 28A. I wouldn't try to take it all in at once, but would read it over a number of times until it makes sense.

I would start with "Understanding the Listings."

Dale

The reason why I measured the -Italy #192 king victor emmanuel iii cent 50
Size 17 1/2 x22mm Perf 14 ,watermarked 140
Is because they where printed between 1927-28
As the a85 stamp design They also carried other denominations such as
The 1.75L,1.85L,2.55L and the 2.65L
Size 19x23mm with a Perf of 11 unwatermarked

There are 3 A85 #193 1.75L
Perforations notated as 13 1/2. 11x131/2 and 13 1/2 x 11
seeing they are all the A85 design

Shouldn't any stamp issued Of the design Have noted perforations and sizes?

Why is the #193 1.75L the only stamp of the design have the differences noted?

They are all The same stamp (A85) just different denominations printed on them